Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Politics | 02/23/2009 11:20 am

Female Lawmakers Looking At 2010 Senate Runs

By The Staff at wowOwow.com
© Shutterstock
There may only be 17 women in the Senate now, but that could change come 2010.

Politico reports that more and more female lawmakers are preparing to run for Senate seats next year. And most of them are Democrats, including Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan — who may have to run against Republican state Treasurer Sarah Steelman — and U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz in Pennsylvania. Then you have two other women — U.S. Reps. Carolyn McCarthy and Carolyn Maloney — who may be vying for the New York Senate seat currently held by Sen. Kristen Gillibrand. Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina also may run against against Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-CA.  Fiorina, who is a Republican and served as a surrogate to John McCain’s presidential campaign last year, on Saturday said the GOP could use a makeover, adding: ”We are not the party of bigwigs and fat cats,” but the party of ”power to the people.”

"This is really unprecedented for leading female candidates jumping in," said Karen O’Connor, director of the Women and Politics Institute at American University. "It really is a landmark year because there’s a farm team now."

Meanwhile, women’s groups are championing Illinois state Democratic Rep. Sara Feigenholtz to fill Rahm Emanuel’s House seat, which was vacated when President Obama tapped him as his chief of staff. An April 7 general election will be held to pick Emanuel’s successor, after a March 3 Democratic primary, and Feigenholtz has a crowded field to win. She has been endorsed by the National Organization for Women, EMILY’s List, Feminist Majority, and others.

And in California, if/once the Rep. Hilda Solis is confirmed as Obama’s labor secretary, a special election will be announced for her eastern Los Angeles House seat. There is at least one woman who is considered a serious candidate in the race — former Monterey Park Mayor Judy Chu. State Sen. Gloria Romero was also said to be in the running for a short time, but she announced last month that she was running for a state education post instead. Chu, a former teacher, recently won the backing of some large labor groups in her race against state Sen. Gil Cedillo. A primary could be held next month.

A U.S. Senate committee on Feb. 11 finally approved the nomination of the pro-labor Solis, and sent it to the full Senate for a vote. 

Good luck to all those women looking to make a difference in Washington!

15 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

S.J. Morgan
"Good luck to all those women looking to make a difference in Washington!"
By S.J. Morgan on 02/23/2009 11:24 am
DeBúrca obj
Both my adult children live in Rahm Emanuel’s district and I’ve been urging them both to vote for Sara Feigenholtz who is running for his House seat.
By DeBúrca obj on 02/23/2009 11:35 am
Ms. Dee
I’m sorry. I can’t wish them all luck just because they’re all female.  If I’ve learned nothing else in my months of participating on wowOwow, it’s that gender doesn’t give anybody a pass when it comes to sound legislation or solid leadership.  Best to scrutinize each as individuals.
By Ms. Dee on 02/23/2009 11:41 am
DeBúrca obj
I’m with you Ms Dee… I only wish politicians, male OR female, ‘luck’ who will support the sort of policy I think is important. However, I suppose if all else was equal as far as capabilities and political views, I would wish a woman luck over a man because we definitely need more women in these positions.
By DeBúrca obj on 02/23/2009 12:24 pm
C Hardy
I think its great!  I would like to see all different kinds of women run!  May the best woman win! 
By C Hardy on 02/23/2009 11:43 am
Queenie .
I’m glad women have come such a long way, baby!
By Queenie . on 02/23/2009 12:58 pm
nanchan u

To support a person solely based on sex, party affiliation, racial profile or sexual orientation is sexist, party-ist (new word?), racist and bigotted.  It’s only the reverse of what has been going on for centuries.

I will continue to vote for whomever I feel is the best candidate for the job, regardless of sex, party (and yes, I have voted against my party lines before!), age, race or sexual orientation. 

That is part of being a democracy…. I think it is more important to educate myself about the candidates stance on issues than to become a fan purely based on physical attributes.

By nanchan u on 02/23/2009 1:02 pm
caj p
All we ever want is the best person for the job, male or female and someone who will cross party lines if it is in the best interests of the country.  At the moment we are not seeing that at all and it is very disturbing seeing as the state we are in and the peoples interests seem to have been forgotten by some.  Politics before reason by many seems to be the order of the day!!
By caj p on 02/23/2009 1:22 pm
Belinda Joy
I don’t like the thought of anyone getting a job solely because of their sex or race, but at first blush it was disturbing when I first realized we only have one Black senator….just one. And then when I learned the number of women who are in the senate, I was again shocked. Are the low numbers as a result of people of color and women not vying for these seats? Curious… But whatever the reason, this article comes as welcome news to me. Whether they are democrats or republicans, I hope there is an influx of fresh minds and objectives from female senators in 2010. Women who can bring a new outlook to the senate and maybe a new way of getting things done in Washington.
By Belinda Joy on 02/23/2009 1:44 pm
S.J. Morgan
I agree Belinda!
By S.J. Morgan on 02/23/2009 3:56 pm
Zera Lee
Ms. Dee is right, gender is not enough. I have Michelle Bachmann in the next precinct to remind me of that. What I do have is Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Rep. Betty McCollum. And, eventually, Franken/Coleman. Boys, boys, boys…
By Zera Lee on 02/23/2009 2:04 pm
starry Nite

Job qualifications are a good thing.  Politics is strange and regional.  Michelle Bachman comes to mind.  She is "infamous".    I would not support her for dog catcher. 

By starry Nite on 02/23/2009 5:09 pm
Ro H
John McCain’s presidential campaign last year, on Saturday said the GOP could use a makeover, adding: ”We are not the party of bigwigs and fat cats,” but the party of ”power to the people." Oh, sure!  When did that happen?  And… who told them to say that?
By Ro H on 02/24/2009 5:50 am
brad berger
Marbury v. Madison decided Feb 24, 1803 and men have dominated the interpretation of consitutional law forever since then. How about the 17 women senators taking the initiative and pushing for the enactment of the ERA amendment for all the other women in the country. It is obvious that if there was the ERA congress would not have had to pass the recent Leadbetter law. The 17 senators have made it - what is their excuse for not pushing ERA especially since there is a Democrat president and congress that will pass the amendment. The states legislatures would also pass the ERA since they would be scared of getting defeated by women. Simply amazing women are not demanding the ERA. I don’t get it but I’m a man.
By brad berger on 02/24/2009 8:07 am